Detection and Characterization of Histamine-Producing Strains of Photobacterium damselae subsp. damselae Isolated from Mullets

Trevisani, Marcello; Mancusi, Rocco; Cecchini, Matilde; Costanza, Claudia; Prearo, Marino

doi:10.3390/vetsci4020031

Cited by 11 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It is well known that host‐derived histamine influences allergy and asthma symptoms . In addition, there are many studies investigating bacterial secretion of histamine in foods . We have previously shown that bacteria capable of secreting histamine and other biogenic amines can be found in the human gut .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bacterial secretion of histamine within the gut influences immune responses within the lung

Barcik

Pugin

Sabaté‐Brescó

et al. 2019

Allergy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:Histamine is an important immunomodulator influencing both the innate and adaptive immune system. Certain host cells express the histidine decarboxylase enzyme (HDC), which is responsible for catalysing the decarboxylation of histidine to histamine. We and others have shown that bacterial strains can also express HDC and secrete histamine; however, the influence of bacterial-derived histamine on the host immune responses distant to the gut is unclear. Methods:The Escherichia coli BL21 (E coli BL21) strain was genetically modified to express the Morganella morganii (M morganii)-derived HDC gene (E coli BL21_HTW).E coli BL21 and E coli BL21_HTW were gavaged to ovalbumin (OVA) sensitized and challenged mice to investigate the effect of bacterial-derived histamine on lung inflammatory responses.Results: Oral administration of E coli BL21_HTW, which is able to secrete histamine, to wild-type mice reduced lung eosinophilia and suppressed ex vivo OVA-stimulated cytokine secretion from lung cells in the OVA respiratory inflammation mouse model.In histamine receptor 2 (H2R)-deficient mice, administration of histamine-secreting bacteria also reduced inflammatory cell numbers in bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL). However, the suppressive effect of bacterial-derived histamine on BAL inflammation was lost in HDC-deficient mice. This loss of activity was associated with increased expression of histamine degrading enzymes and reduced histamine receptor expression. Conclusion:Histamine secretion from bacteria within the gut can have immunological consequences at distant mucosal sites, such as within the lung. These effects are influenced by host histamine receptor expression and the expression of histamine degrading enzymes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bacterial secretion of histamine within the gut influences immune responses within the lung

Barcik

Pugin

Sabaté‐Brescó

et al. 2019

Allergy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The green colonies that grew on TCBS were tested to detect the presence of Photobacterium damselae subsp. damselae using the procedure developed by Trevisani et al (2017). The black colonies that grew on the Iron Agar plates (25°C, 3 days) indicative of H 2 S-producing bacteria were picked and presumptively identified as Shewanella spp.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, non-inoculated samples were analyzed for the presence of HPB by testing the level of histamine produced in HD broth enrichment at 20°C, 2 days). The isolated strains were also evaluated for the presence of histidine decarboxylase gene of the Gram- bacteria (De Las Rivas et al, 2006; Trevisani et al, 2017) and their ability to produce histamine in HD broth. With this aim single colonies isolated from the fish samples (or used for the challenge tests, section “Bacterial Strains Used for the Challenge Tests”) were cultured in duplicate in 10 ml HD broth at 4°C for 5 days ( P. phosphoreum ) or 20°C for 2 days ( M. psychrotolerans and other HPB) and histamine was extracted as described in the section “Extraction of Histamine From Bacterial Cultures and Recovery Tests” and detected by the enzyme-based amperometric biosensor, as described in the section “Histamine Biosensor Calibration and Assay Procedure.”…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biosensing the Histamine Producing Potential of Bacteria in Tuna

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Histamine poisoning is the most common cause of human foodborne illness due to the consumption of fish products. An enzyme-based amperometric biosensor was developed to be used as a screening tool to detect histamine and histamine-producing bacteria (HPB) in tuna. It was developed by immobilizing histidine decarboxylase and horseradish peroxidase on the surface of screen-printed electrodes through a cross-linking procedure employing glutaraldehyde and bovine serum albumin. The signal generated in presence of histamine at the surface of the electrode was measured by chronoamperometry at in presence of a soluble redox mediator. The sensitivity of the electrode was 1.31–1.59 μA/mM, with a linear range from 2 to 20 μg/ml and detection limit of 0.11 μg/ml. In this study fresh tuna filets purchased in supermarkets in different days ( n = 8) were analyzed to detect HPB. Samples with different concentration of histamine were analyzed with culture-based counting methods, biosensor and HPLC and also a challenge test was made. Recovery of histamine from cultures and tuna samples was also assessed. The presence of Morganella psychrotolerans , Photobacterium phosphoreum , P. damselae and Hafnia alvei was detected using culture- and PCR-based methods. At the time of purchase these tuna samples had histamine concentrations from below the limit of detection (LOD) to 60 μg/g. HPLC and biosensor methods provided similar results in the range from zero to 432 μg/g (correlation coefficient, R 2 = 0.990) and the recovery of histamine from cultures and tuna samples was very high (mean bias −12.69 to 1.63%, with root-mean-square error <12%). These results clearly show that fresh tuna is commonly contaminated with strong HPB. The histamine biosensor can be used by the Food Business Operators as a screening tool to detect their presence and to determine whether their process controls are adequate or not.

show abstract

“…Damselae (Pdd), Photobacterium, i.e. and P. Phosphoreum detected in sh esh which can impulse the activity of histidine decarboxylase encountered in tuna, mackerel and bonito (Trevisani et al, 2017). These bacteria are very strong that they can produce histamine and Photobacterium damselae subsp.…”

Section: Biogenic Amines Histamine and Their Issuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Tuna sh His Chemical sensor using aerosol -jet -printed graphene 3.1 x 10 −5 (Parate et al, 2020) Marine sh His Amperometric biosensor using diamine oxidase and peroxidase as molecular recognition element Not de ned (Trevisani et al, 2017) Food products Voltammetric sensor based on molecularly imprinted polymer (MIP) 7.4 x 10 −11 (Akhoundian et al, 2017) Chicken meat Put, Cad, Tyr Amperometric biosensor using pea seedling amine oxidase (PSAO) as molecular recognition element 1.2-4.5 x 10 −5 Telsnig et al…”

Section: Food Samplementioning

confidence: 99%

Biogenic Amines Detection by Chromatography and Sensor Methods: A Comparative Review

Munir

Badri²,

Heng³

2020

sci. technol. indones.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biogenic amines (BA) are chemistry compounds shaped by amino acids decarboxylation and exist in protein food and beverages. They are labelled toxic if consumed and some countries prohibit to consume them in high level especially histamine. Two major methods have been used and developed well such as chromatography methods and sensors methods. The common method applied for chromatography namely liquid chromatography (LC) and gas chromatography (GC) while for sensor methods such as optical, chemical and bio sensor. These methods have advantages and disadvantages. For chromatography methods, derivatization methods are required in order to improve their sensitivity and selectivity, nevertheless these methods are very expensive and time-consuming. During derivatization step, it needs more time and bear the risk of an only partial detection due to an incomplete derivatization. Furthermore, sensor methods exist to solve these issues, while they do not require derivatization step, generate a direct signal that can be interpreted by anyone, very fast and simple, yet they have disadvantages in several aspects such as sensitivity, accuracy and selectivity compared to chromatography methods. This review is based on studies about biogenic amines detection from the last decades until now and related to food and beverage samples. Although biogenic amines commonly found in protein-food for decades, new approaches and technical possibilities still required in order to increase the sensitivity, selectivity and accuracy of analytical methods to tackle the complexity by their matrices. The rationale of this study is also to provide data about the comparison of the analytical techniques between conventional and sensor methods. Furthermore, the various approaches of biogenic amines determination and the most applied analytical methods have been reviewed.

show abstract

Detection and Characterization of Histamine-Producing Strains of Photobacterium damselae subsp. damselae Isolated from Mullets

Cited by 11 publications

References 37 publications

Bacterial secretion of histamine within the gut influences immune responses within the lung

Bacterial secretion of histamine within the gut influences immune responses within the lung

Biosensing the Histamine Producing Potential of Bacteria in Tuna

Biogenic Amines Detection by Chromatography and Sensor Methods: A Comparative Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About